Man Convicted of Hacking Despite Not Hacking

Re:Man Convicted of Hacking Despite Not Hacking by etvmueller on Thursday April 25, 2013 @09:47PM (#5611041)

I understand and I share your point of view to a degree, but I remain skeptical that until CFAA, there were no successful prosecutions for crimes that we are told are only now covered by CFAA. Computers and criminals have been around for a while now.

I am also opposed to the idea that we need specific crime laws for things like this. What about vehicular manslaughter while listening to an iPod, and why would that not be covered as distraction equivalent to listening to radio, which I assume and also hope that it would be. There should be some respect for the intent of existing law in addition to the letter, because we do have laws for theft and I am certain that the intent of those laws covers these cases.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Man Convicted of Hacking Despite Not Hacking by tptacek on Thursday April 25, 2013 @10:58PM (#5611256)

Before CFAA, computer crimes were charged under wire fraud statutes. But to prove wire fraud you have to establish the elements of a fraud, which include deliberate intent to secure some kind of gain from your deception.

[ Parent | on HN ]